Poll: Publicís trust in Bush at low ebb - U2 Feedback

Go Back   U2 Feedback > Lypton Village > Free Your Mind > Free Your Mind Archive
Click Here to Login
 
 
Thread Tools Search this Thread Display Modes
 
Old 02-13-2004, 12:42 PM   #1
Blue Crack Addict
 
anitram's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2001
Location: NY
Posts: 16,289
Local Time: 02:45 PM
Poll: Publicís trust in Bush at low ebb

From Washington Post / MSNBC.

Quote:
WASHINGTON - A majority of Americans believe President Bush either lied or deliberately exaggerated evidence that Iraq possessed weapons of mass destruction in order to justify war, according to a new Washington Post-ABC News poll.

...

Barely half -- 52 percent -- now believe Bush is "honest and trustworthy," down 7 percentage points since late October and his worst showing since the question was first asked, in March 1999. At his best, in the summer of 2002, Bush was viewed as honest by 71 percent. The survey found that nearly seven in 10 think Bush "honestly believed" Iraq had weapons of mass destruction. Even so, 54 percent thought Bush exaggerated or lied about prewar intelligence.

...

Questions about Bush's use of prewar intelligence, in addition to feeding doubts about his honesty, have sent his performance rating plummeting. Fifty percent of Americans approve of the job he is doing, the lowest level of his presidency in Post-ABC polling and down 8 percentage points from January. The survey found that, for the first time since the war ended, fewer than half of Americans -- 48 percent -- believe the war was worth fighting, down 8 points from last month. Fifty percent said the war was not worth it.

...

The survey found a steep drop in public perceptions of Bush as a president and as an individual. In a sign that Bush has been set back by recent controversies over Iraqi weapons, his National Guard record and the federal budget, the number of Americans viewing him as a "strong leader" has slipped to 61 percent, down 6 points from December and the lowest level since the 2001 terrorist attacks.

Bush's rating on handling the economy stood at 44 percent, down 7 percentage points, with nearly half of the public saying they are worse off now than they were when Bush became president three years ago. Six in 10 disapprove of the job Bush is doing creating jobs. On education, 47 percent said they approve of the job Bush is doing, down 8 points from January. And his rating on health care has also fallen.

But the president's declining ratings related to Iraq were most striking. Approval of his handling of the situation there has fallen to 47 percent, down 8 percentage points in the past three weeks. About half of Americans -- 51 percent -- said they would prefer a report evaluating the accuracy and use of prewar intelligence before the election, while 35 percent favor what Bush has ordered: a broader study of the overall accuracy of U.S. intelligence-gathering operations that reports its findings after the election.
__________________

__________________
anitram is online now  
Old 02-13-2004, 12:47 PM   #2
Blue Crack Addict
 
nbcrusader's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2002
Location: Southern California
Posts: 22,071
Local Time: 11:45 AM
Is the election Kerry's to lose?

At this rate, GWB will need a drop in unemployment and Osama's head on a platter to win in November.
__________________

__________________
nbcrusader is offline  
Old 02-13-2004, 02:37 PM   #3
BVS
Blue Crack Supplier
 
BVS's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2002
Location: between my head and heart
Posts: 40,673
Local Time: 01:45 PM
Quote:
Originally posted by nbcrusader
Is the election Kerry's to lose?

At this rate, GWB will need a drop in unemployment and Osama's head on a platter to win in November.
That's already in cold storage to be thawed out in time for the election.
__________________
BVS is online now  
Old 02-13-2004, 03:13 PM   #4
Rock n' Roll Doggie
Band-aid
 
theSoulfulMofo's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2001
Posts: 4,490
Local Time: 12:45 PM
http://www.pollingreport.com/BushJob.htm

According to this website that collects Presidential approval rating polls from CNN, Gallup, Time, Newsweek, etc., Bush's approval rating is NOW about where it was before 9/11.

Post 9/11, Bush's approval rating jumped up around 80%. And every year following after that, his approval rating dropped at an average of 10%...

And now, Bush's rating is fluctuating around the same average as pre-9/11.

I think this year's presidential election is gonna be a pretty close call.
__________________
theSoulfulMofo is offline  
Old 02-14-2004, 05:52 AM   #5
Rock n' Roll Doggie
VIP PASS
 
Rono's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2000
Location: the Netherlands
Posts: 6,163
Local Time: 08:45 PM
Quote:
Originally posted by theSoulfulMofo
http://www.pollingreport.com/BushJob.htm


I think this year's presidential election is gonna be a pretty close call.
Florida, here we come,....
__________________
Rono is offline  
Old 02-14-2004, 05:54 AM   #6
Rock n' Roll Doggie
VIP PASS
 
Rono's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2000
Location: the Netherlands
Posts: 6,163
Local Time: 08:45 PM
What will happen when they find a longhair Kerry picture, at a protestmars against the war in Vietnam ?
__________________
Rono is offline  
Old 02-14-2004, 07:39 AM   #7
ONE
love, blood, life
 
Join Date: Aug 2002
Posts: 10,881
Local Time: 02:45 PM
Quote:
Originally posted by Rono
What will happen when they find a longhair Kerry picture, at a protestmars against the war in Vietnam ?
__________________
Dreadsox is offline  
Old 02-16-2004, 06:07 PM   #8
Rock n' Roll Doggie
VIP PASS
 
Rono's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2000
Location: the Netherlands
Posts: 6,163
Local Time: 08:45 PM
Quote:
Originally posted by Dreadsox


Yeah for Kerry,....
__________________
Rono is offline  
Old 02-16-2004, 11:10 PM   #9
ONE
love, blood, life
 
Join Date: Aug 2002
Posts: 10,881
Local Time: 02:45 PM
It apparently was a doctored photo...sorry
__________________
Dreadsox is offline  
Old 02-17-2004, 12:32 PM   #10
Blue Crack Addict
 
MrsSpringsteen's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2002
Posts: 24,984
Local Time: 02:45 PM

I don't think that was the doctored photo-I thought the doctored one was the black and white one.

Here's what I posted in another thread re the color photo

Wednesday, a Kerry campaign aide confirmed that Kerry was at the rally and he did speak.

But Kerry's aides stress that he and Jane Fonda were only acquaintances; the rally was nearly two-years before Fonda's contentious trip to North Vietnam; and, they say, Kerry did not support Fonda's trip.

Jane Fonda spoke for herself, telling CNN:

"My reaction is that the American people have had it with the big lie. Any attempt to link Kerry to me and make him look bad with that connection is completely false. We were at a rally for veterans at the same time. I spoke, Donald Sutherland spoke, John Kerry spoke at the end. I don't even think we shook hands. And they're also saying this organization, the Vietnam Veterans Against the War, was a Communist organization. This was an organization of men who risked their lives in Vietnam, who considered themselves totally patriotic. So anyone who slams that organization and slams Kerry for being part of it is doing an injustice to veterans. How can you impugn, how can you even suggest, that anyone like Kerry or any of these veterans were not patriotic? He was a hero there."
__________________
MrsSpringsteen is offline  
Old 02-17-2004, 04:00 PM   #11
Blue Crack Addict
 
verte76's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2002
Location: hoping for changes
Posts: 23,331
Local Time: 07:45 PM
This happened *before* Fonda's trip! OK, I had forgotten when Fonda did her trip. This really is a bum rap on Kerry. Karl Rove is going to have to get smarter in the smear department, this stuff is pretty weak.
__________________
verte76 is offline  
Old 02-17-2004, 04:05 PM   #12
Blue Crack Addict
 
nbcrusader's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2002
Location: Southern California
Posts: 22,071
Local Time: 11:45 AM
Quote:
Originally posted by verte76
Karl Rove is going to have to get smarter in the smear department, this stuff is pretty weak.
This comment is no better than the "doctored" photo. Guilt by association - the American way!
__________________
nbcrusader is offline  
Old 02-17-2004, 05:28 PM   #13
Blue Crack Addict
 
verte76's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2002
Location: hoping for changes
Posts: 23,331
Local Time: 07:45 PM
Quote:
Originally posted by nbcrusader


This comment is no better than the "doctored" photo. Guilt by association - the American way!
Busted. I probably need a sabbatical from politics. I will try to do better. I'm scheduled to do confession this weekend. No word on how many confessions I'll have to do just on politics-related sins.
__________________
verte76 is offline  
Old 02-18-2004, 08:17 PM   #14
Blue Crack Addict
 
deep's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2002
Location: A far distance down.
Posts: 28,501
Local Time: 11:45 AM
Quote:
Originally posted by verte76
This happened *before* Fonda's trip! OK, I had forgotten when Fonda did her trip. This really is a bum rap on Kerry. Karl Rove is going to have to get smarter in the smear department, this stuff is pretty weak.

verte,


you are probably right


these are typical of rove tactics.


there may not be "proof".

but everything polints in that direction.


rove is scum
__________________
deep is offline  
Old 02-18-2004, 08:21 PM   #15
Blue Crack Addict
 
deep's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2002
Location: A far distance down.
Posts: 28,501
Local Time: 11:45 AM
here is an article supporting why the public should not trust Bush

Quote:
Scientists Charge Bush With Distorting Science




The Associated Press

February 18, 2004, 4:05 PM EST

WASHINGTON -- President Bush's administration distorts scientific findings and seeks to manipulate experts' advice to avoid information that runs counter to its political beliefs, a private organization of scientists asserted on Wednesday.

The Union of Concerned Scientists contended in a report that "the scope and scale of the manipulation, suppression and misrepresentation of science by the Bush administration is unprecedented."

"We're not taking issue with administration policies. We're taking issue with the administration's distortion ... of the science related to some of its policies," said the group's president, Kurt Gottfried.

White House spokesman Scott McClellan said he had not seen the report but that the administration "makes decisions based on the best available science."

White House science adviser John Marburger said he found the report "somewhat disappointing ... because it makes some sweeping generalizations about policy in this administration that are based on a random selection of incidents and issues."

He added, "I don't think it makes the case for the sweeping accusations that it makes."

Marburger acknowledged that the complaint was signed by a wide assortment of prominent scientists, including Nobel Prize winners and recipients of the National Medal of Science.

That, he said, is "evidence we are not communicating with them as we should and I'll have to deal with that."

"We need to have a dialogue about what is actually happening, but this report does not do it," Marburger said.

F. Sherwood Rowland, a Nobel prize winner for his studies of ozone in the atmosphere, was particularly critical of the administration's approach to climate change.

He said the consensus of scientific opinion about global warming is being ignored and that government reports have been censored to remove views not in tune with Bush's politics.

The union's report came at the same time the National Academy of Science was releasing its own study that commends the administration's plan to study climate but also expresses concern that the research was underfunded and not being pursued vigorously enough.

Asked if they had seen any political interference in the climate program, Thomas E. Graedel of Yale University, chairman of the academy committee, said his group did not look for that. But, he added, he had not seen anything that would suggest the research plan had such political concerns.

A commission member, Anthony L. Janetos of the John Heinz III Center for Science, Economics and the Environment, noted that the climate program involves high level members of the administration.

That's a two-edged sword, Janetos said. It means scientists are dealing with people who can make decisions and provide resources, but it also creates a challenge in maintaining scientific credibility.

Among the examples cited in the union's report:

--a 2003 report that the administration sought changes in an Environmental Protection Agency climate study, including deletion of a 1,000-year temperature record and removal of reference to a study that attributed some of global warming to human activity.

--a delay in an EPA report on mercury pollution from some power plants.

--a charge that the administration pressed the Centers for Disease Control to end a project called "Programs that Work," which found sex education programs that did not insist only on abstinence were still effective.
__________________

__________________
deep is offline  
 

Thread Tools Search this Thread
Search this Thread:

Advanced Search
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Trackbacks are Off
Pingbacks are Off
Refbacks are Off



All times are GMT -5. The time now is 02:45 PM.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.8 Beta 1
Copyright ©2000 - 2017, vBulletin Solutions, Inc.
Design, images and all things inclusive copyright © Interference.com